downstream resource allocation in docsis 3.0 channel bonded networks

131 Pages·2017·1.16 MB·English

Clemson University
TigerPrints
All Dissertations Dissertations
8-2011
DOWNSTREAM RESOURCE ALLOCATION
IN DOCSIS 3.0 CHANNEL BONDED
NETWORKS
Scott Moser
Clemson University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at:https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations
Part of theComputer Sciences Commons
Recommended Citation
Moser, Scott, "DOWNSTREAM RESOURCE ALLOCATION IN DOCSIS 3.0 CHANNEL BONDED NETWORKS" (2011).All
Dissertations. 780.
https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/780
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Dissertations by
an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please [email protected].
DOWNSTREAM RESOURCE ALLOCATION IN DOCSIS 3.0
CHANNEL BONDED NETWORKS

A Dissertation
Presented to
the Graduate School of
Clemson University

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Computer Science

by
Scott A. Moser
August 2011

Accepted by:
James J. Martin, Committee Chair
James M. Westall
Harold C. Grossman
Brian C. Dean
ABSTRACT

Modern broadband internet access cable systems follow the Data Over Cable
System Interface Specification (DOCSIS) for data transfer between the individual cable
modem (CM) and the Internet. The newest version of DOCSIS, version 3.0, provides an
abstraction referred to as bonding groups to help manage bandwidth and to increase
bandwidth to each user beyond that available within a single 6MHz. television channel.
Channel bonding allows more than one channel to be used by a CM to provide a virtual
channel of much greater bandwidth. This combining of channels into bonding groups,
especially when channels overlap between more than one bonding group, complicates the
resource allocation problem within these networks.
The goal of resource allocation in this research is twofold, to provide for fairness
among users while at the same time making maximum possible utilization of the
available system bandwidth. The problem of resource allocation in computer networks
has been widely studied by the academic community. Past work has studied resource
allocation in many network types, however application in a DOCSIS channel bonded
network has not been explored.
This research begins by first developing a definition of fairness in a channel
bonded system. After providing a theoretical definition of fairness we implement
simulations of different scheduling disciplines and evaluate their performance against this
theoretical ideal. The complexity caused by overlapped channels requires even the
simplest scheduling algorithms to be modified to work correctly.
ii
We then develop an algorithm to maximize the use of the available system
bandwidth. The approach involves using competitive analysis techniques and an online
algorithm to dynamically reassign flows among the available channels. Bandwidth usage
and demand requests are monitored for bandwidth that is underutilized, and demand that
is unsatisfied, and real time changes are made to the flow-to-channel mappings to
improve the utilization of the total available bandwidth.
The contribution of this research is to provide a working definition of fairness in a
channel bonded environment, the implementation of several scheduling disciplines and
evaluation of their adherence to that definition, and development of an algorithm to
improve overall bandwidth utilization of the system.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Foremost I want to thank my advisor Jim Martin. I was at Clemson less than two
months before two different people, both of whom are on the committee, told me “you
need to talk to Jim Martin”. Due to my part time status we have had an eight year
association during which time I have learned a great deal from him about the entire
research process.
Additionally I want to thank each of the other members of the committee. Mike
Westall, from whom I learned to always use the simplest possible examples to prove a
concept. Harold Grossman, who taught the first course I took here. I believe that
compiler course to be the best possible course to evaluate someone‟s overall
understanding of the field of computer science, (it was also the most time consuming one
in my life). Lastly Brian Dean, the latest member of the committee, who exposed me to
the world of algorithms and the joy of not having to operate in the “real world”. These
four committee members were all great mentors during this process and have all become
friends as well.
I would also like to thank Cisco Systems, Inc. for the Research Award DOCSIS
3.0 Scheduling Algorithms, which provided the topic for this dissertation and much
valuable input on current DOCSIS technology.
Lastly I would like to thank the School of Computing, Computer Science Division
(formerly the Computer Science Department), for the opportunity to undertake this
program on a part time basis.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE .................................................................................................................... i

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................. iv

LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................... vii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ ix

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1

1.1 The DOCSIS Resource Allocation Problem ...................................... 2
1.2 DOCSIS 3.0 Channel Bonding .......................................................... 4
1.3 Problem Formulation and Research Objectives ................................. 7
1.4 Chapter Outline .................................................................................. 8

II. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................... 10

2.1 Scheduling Disciplines..................................................................... 10
2.2 DOCSIS Operation .......................................................................... 18
2.3 Review of DOCSIS Scheduling Literature ...................................... 26

III. DEFINING FAIRNESS IN DOCSIS 3.0 .................................................... 44

3.1 Max-min Fairness ............................................................................ 44
3.2 The Channel Bonded Network as a Network Flow Problem ........... 48
3.3 Finding Fair Allocations .................................................................. 51

IV. IMPLEMENTING FAIR SCHEDULING IN DOCSIS 3.0 ........................ 56

4.1 System Model .................................................................................. 58
4.2 DRR in a Channel Bonded Network ................................................ 61
4.3 SCFQ in a Channel Bonded Network .............................................. 64
4.4 Results .............................................................................................. 71

v
Table of Contents (Continued)

Page

V. MAXIMIZING BANDWIDTH UTILIZATION ........................................ 79

5.1 Online Algorithms and Competitive Analysis ................................. 82
5.2 Methodology .................................................................................... 84
5.3 Results .............................................................................................. 97

VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS ..................................................................... 103

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 106

A: Threshold and Remapping Data................................................................. 107

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 116
vi
LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

5.1 Unsatisfied Demand .................................................................................. 102

A.1 Scenario 1 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 107

A.2 Scenario 2 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 107

A.3 Scenario 3 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 107

A.4 Scenario 4 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 108

A.5 Scenario 5 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 108

A.6 Scenario 6 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 108

A.7 Scenario 7 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 109

A.8 Scenario 8 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 109

A.9 Scenario 9 Unsatisfied Demand ................................................................ 109

A.10 Scenario 1 Throughput .............................................................................. 110

A.11 Scenario 2 Throughput .............................................................................. 110

A.12 Scenario 3 Throughput .............................................................................. 110

A.13 Scenario 4 Throughput .............................................................................. 111

A.14 Scenario 5 Throughput .............................................................................. 111

A.15 Scenario 6 Throughput .............................................................................. 111

A.16 Scenario 7 Throughput .............................................................................. 112

A.17 Scenario 8 Throughput .............................................................................. 112

A.18 Scenario 9 Throughput .............................................................................. 112

vii
List of Tables (Continued)

Table Page

A.19 Scenario 1 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 113

A.20 Scenario 2 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 113

A.21 Scenario 3 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 113

A.22 Scenario 4 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 114

A.23 Scenario 5 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 114

A.24 Scenario 6 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 114

A.25 Scenario 7 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 115

A.26 Scenario 8 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 115

A.27 Scenario 9 Number of Remaps ................................................................. 115

viii
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

3.1 Flow Network for Channel Bonded Systems .............................................. 50

3.2 Allocation Example .................................................................................... 54

4.1 Multiple Channel Network Model .............................................................. 57

4.2 DOCSIS 3.0 ns System Model Scheduling ................................................. 60

4.3 Pseudo Code – DRR init ............................................................................. 62

4.4 Pseudo Code – DRR selectPacket ............................................................... 63

4.5 Pseudo Code – Global Scheduler SCFQ init .............................................. 65

4.6 Pseudo Code – Global Scheduler SCFQ selectPacket ................................ 66

4.7 Pseudo Code – Channel Scheduler SCFQ init ............................................ 68

4.8 Pseudo Code – Channel Scheduler SCFQ selectPacket .............................. 69

4.9 Experiment 1: Two Flow Allocation Results............................................... 73

4.10 Experiment 2: Two Flow Allocation Results............................................... 75

4.11 Experiment 3: Two Flow Allocation Results with Variable Packet Size ... 77

5.1 Unbalanced Channels .................................................................................. 80

5.2 Optimal Offline Algorithm ......................................................................... 87

5.3 Pseudo Code – find_max_allocation .......................................................... 90

5.4 Pseudo Code – When To Remap ................................................................ 91

5.5 Pseudo Code – remap1 ................................................................................ 93

5.6 Integer Linear Program – remap2 ............................................................... 94

5.7 Pseudo Code – remap3 ................................................................................ 96
ix